Having multiple women running will bifurcate the attention these candidates are going to get from the press. Before you had all tehse men and one women and so you get a lot of focus on the lone woman. Having many women will change the dynamic and will be much harder for the press to do their usual bullshit.

Good thought. It’s why women have always said that you have to have a critical mass (doesn’t have to be 50%) in order to have actual agency in corporations, newsrooms, classrooms, the senate, etc.

It’s not fun to be the only girl in the room, because your “onliness” becomes the salient fact about you. What is wrong with you that you want to do this thing that you’re clearly not supposed to do? Are you some kind of show off? Are you a freak of nature with those mad math skills? Are you trying to prove something?

Good for her. I like seeing women and WoC running. But I’m also sort of perplexed by her. As I said in an earlier thread, I’m not sure what her motivation for running would be, but I suppose she’ll tell us. I don’t know much about her other than what I saw during the Kavenaugh hearing and I have to say I wasn’t much wowed in that context. What does she know about foreign policy? Anything? I guess she was a good State Attorney General in CA, but I just don’t know anything about her. I mean, I don’t even know if she’s married or has kids or what she did before she was AG.

And if you’re wondering about her policy goals, I’m sure you could review her Senate campaign materials and proposals in office. Her record as AG and prior career probably has some documentation available around the internet.

I follow Kamala on Instagram. She does post lots of pictures of her cooking. Her husband is white. They’re a cute couple. She’s got steel in her spine and impressed me during the Kavanaugh hearings, making it clear he was unqualified before even getting to the weird sex and drinking stuff.

We knew she was in when California moved our primary up to March 3. That puts a fuckton of delegates from a big blue majority minority state that has voted strongly for Harris multiple times very early in the calendar. And because we start early voting 4 weeks ahead, and are moving to mail voting, I’ll go out on a limb and say that more ballots in California will be cast by the day of New Hampshire primary than are cast in New Hampshire.

Since the media will be hung up on Iowa and New Hampshire because they enjoy the spectacle of it all, candidates will still largely ignore California, and Harris will roll out of March 3 with the delegate lead to the surprise of all (as Obama did on Super Tuesday in 2008 for the same reasons). I’m not sure how the Dems are planning to apportion delegates for 2020, other than superdelegates are going away, but my understanding is that they’ll be apportioned relative to how blue the state is. California is really fucking blue. 46 of 53 House members, 2 senators, plus every state office. We’re going to have a shit-ton of delegates landing on that day. If CA gets Iowa attention from the media, it could be a real race. Otherwise, these are Harris’ votes to lose.

Let’s confront the truth. Many middle-class Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, even as the costs of health care, tuition, and housing have soared. We need to build an economy that gives dignity and decency to American workers.
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) January 10, 2019

I’m asking here because I want to know what other people think her accomplishments are. She’s going to tell us what she thinks they are. As for her website, that’s an easy but not good barometer of what she’s done. It only highlights what she wants to highlight. I want to know what people who’ve watched her at work have to say. At this point in the race, it’s up to her to tell me. I won’t be voting in a primary until, at the earliest, next April. If she wants me to donate or work for her, it’s up to her to convince me. Not for me to have to do all the work.

And as far as policy and experience, Kamala’s DA past will likely be essential considering all the criming going on in the Trump regime, and how long it’ll take to prosecute (legally and in the court of opinion) these MOFOs, yes?

@geg6: I don’t know what Harris’s stances are on foreign policy. I’d like to find out more. Warren gave one speech on foreign policy that morphed into a speech on trade. A consistent voice on foreign policy on the Democratic side is Chris Murphy. He was the first Senator to speak up about Saudi Arabia’s attacks on civilians in Yemen and has consistently chimed in on other foreign policy issues. If he would declare, he would be my first choice but I haven’t heard any rumblings on that front.

@Gin & Tonic: Heh. As I recall she was hammering him on how much footsie he was playing with the GOP in his prep and answers and got him to lie under oath, and didn’t hit the Dr. Blasse-Ford story hard, leaving that to others. I also recall how genuinely pissed she looked. We’re going to need that.

Harris is not interested in crusading from the outside; her mission is to reform the system from within. And no chapter of her life better reveals this dynamic than her days as a newly elected district attorney in San Francisco, working to get one radical program off the ground.

A quick Google search produced several articles about her tenure as attorney general and Senator, personal biography, and more. Too many links to post, but this may prove a fruitful endeavor for those eager to learn more.

Oh but if there is more than one woman running, and especially if there are more than 2, we will be treated to the “Women are taking over” trope. People tend to see way more of a previously under-represented group once there is more that the one person (who was expected to represent EVERY member of their group). What I mean is if there are several women in a group, team etc when there previously were none, people will perceive that there are more women than there actually are: Here’s an interesting article about the phenomenon – https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/human-nature/perception/how-17-equals-496-the-amazing-multiplying-women.htm

Women are also perceived to talk more than men, but in most settings both personal and professional my experience has been that men talk more and men interrupt more. I have found that if I talk the same amount and for the same length of time, as men at the same meeting, I am seen as having talked more…

So I went to Wikipedia. Ugh. A Willie Brown protege? Not sure I want that. Looking at the other stuff, I see things I like and things I really, really don’t like. So, on balance, I’m not totally enthusiastic. But maybe, as I’ve said earlier, she can convince me.

Oh but if there is more than one woman running, and especially if there are more than 2, we will be treated to the “Women are taking over” trope.

…mainly among those already prone to thinking that way. To others it may have a normalizing effect, making it seem more natural to think of women as potential presidential material. To some, it may help them realize how sincere Democrats are as far as taking women seriously as leaders.

@geg6: just FYI: This is a newish nym for the Wilmer troll who one night halfway through a second box of wine declared, “If I can’t have Bernie, let it all burn.” S/he’s been playing the reasonable commenter lately, but the troll behind the mask always shows through eventually.

and I agree with you about the Kavanaugh hearing, the way she built up that Kassowitz thing like she had devastating evidence to bring up in a Matlock/LA Law-ish moment was a weird blunder. I still wonder if there’s a story there. But I like her a lot. Everybody stumbles.

To those who say, “Trump should give DACA, Pelosi should do the wall,” we must say a clear, “No.” The wall isn’t negotiable b/c it’s based on lies, racism & white nationalism. It’s like saying “White Only” signs were OK as long as Black folks got clean restrooms.

The next President is not going to be doing anything remotely like prosecuting the Trump cartel. That’s not what Presidents do, so her experience as a prosecutor, while valuable, shouldn’t make people expect she’ll be prosecutin’ while Presidentin’.

I will vote for whomever is the Democratic nominee, whether they’re my preferred candidate or not.

The only person I will raise holy hell about right now is Tulsi Gabbard. I think Tulsi Gabbard is bad for the Democratic party in every way, shape and form and would prefer she be strapped to a rocket and fired into the sun, never to spoken of again.

If I have to vote for Bernie, I will. But please don’t make me vote for that asshole.

I would like someone like Amy Klobuchar to do really well. She just seems so honest and nice. I miss honest and nice.

@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I have noticed trolls often try to mix some reasonable sounding commentary in with the trolling. If they want to have some influence on opinion as opposed to just disrupting the conversation that is necessary.

And as far as policy and experience, Kamala’s DA past will likely be essential considering all the criming going on in the Trump regime, and how long it’ll take to prosecute (legally and in the court of opinion) these MOFOs, yes?

Maybe. My limited experience is that DAs are politicians first and attorney prosecutors second, or third, or maybe not much at all (that weird vampire-looking dude from NYC comes to mind – wasn’t he a DA at some point?). Not say that that is the case with Harris, just saying, it ain’t ipso facto.

@Fair Economist: Then some others post here for almost a decade and aren’t deemed a troll until they come to a major disagreement with other people who have been posting here just as long, demonstrated their own trollish tendencies, but just happened to agree with more of the people posting at the time.

I think the emergence of highly qualified Democratic candidates for president, with women of colour well represented, can only be a good thing. I’m confident there is plenty of time to choose a strong and well-qualified nominee.

Before anyone announced, I was enjoying the prospect, optically, of having multiple women candidates in a presidential debate. Preferably 3 or more, which is critical mass. Then it wouldn’t be just one woman bearing all the weight and dealing with all the clothing scrutiny. Whatever happens, that’s a step forward.

@geg6:
She’s a bit of a cypher even to Sacramento folks, so you’re not alone here. Many use her as a projection screen–understandably, since she’s a powerful public presence and quite no-nonsense–but I too wish to know more about her key issues and approach to governance.

If she runs, great! I’ll be quite interested in how she handles the grueling campaign trail (had a relative cakewalk to the senate here).

FWIW I know somebody who worked for her as AG and he’s on the brink of retiring, so maybe he’ll open up at some point.

@rikyrah: Thank you. I always say, I accidentally rescued one years ago and it’s been Danes ever since. There’s something about having one of those big goofs lean against you and give you all their trust that melts me. That and they love to make people laugh.

I don’t have any sort of clear preference yet, save that I want St. Bernard banned from running as a Democrat. Oh, and Tulsi Gabbard. Both of them reactionaries in radicals’ clothing, far as I’m concerned.

Other than that, all I think is that the more women declaring on the Democrats’ side, the better. Scatter the RW fire, as well as normalizing the prospect of a woman in charge. Nancy SMASH!’s performance as Speaker is going to be an immense boost to that effort, imho.

@JMS: efore anyone announced, I was enjoying the prospect, optically, of having multiple women candidates in a presidential debate. Preferably 3 or more, which is critical mass.

Warren, Harris and it sounds increasingly like Klobuchar is going to “form an exploratory committee”. I haven’t heard anything about Stacy Abrams that sounds like it comes from Stacy Abrams. I wonder if, at only 45, she’s playing a long game. Or maybe… just doesn’t want the damn job.

remember when Rs wanted to amend the Constitution to let Ahnuld run? I was all for it because of Jennifer Granholm (nee Canadianite) who seems to have faded away. Obama wanted her for DNC chair, but she backed out at the last minute.

Kamala was on The View, pronunciation was the first question after Whoopi missed it. I didn’t know either, yes it is like Pamela. Re hearings, maybe lacking against K but she ripped Jeff Sessions pretty good in his confirmation, she had him whining about his ‘southern pride’ when she pressed him to stop filibustering. If she doesn’t make President I for damn sure want her as Attorney General!

The next President is not going to be doing anything remotely like prosecuting the Trump cartel. That’s not what Presidents do, so her experience as a prosecutor, while valuable, shouldn’t make people expect she’ll be prosecutin’ while Presidentin’.

The sad fact is, since pardoning Nixon, we’ve had president after president commit and get away with illegal activity. It might be nice to change that trend.

@J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford: I like Klobuchar, too, and I think her girl-nextdoor, no-muss-no-fuss air would be very appealing to wide swaths of the electorate after the endless drama, chaos, corruption and lies of Trump.

@geg6: I was thinking about your question in the last thread about her motivation for running. Had a couple of ideas.

Could be a way to present oneself as a VP/running mate? Establish stats on your popularity and draw in different regions. Get some interviews and sound bites out there. Improve one’s campaign speaking. Or a way to set up a real run 4-8 years from now. Find sympathetic reporters and funding sources and get to know what skills your organization lacks.

Congressional politics used to be about trades, compromise. Democracy, not the absolute adherence to the hierarchy and profit of big business that Republicans practice in all 3 branches now.

I still view Democratic candidates for president who come from Congress as probably practicing the idea of trading when they start a run that won’t go all the way. Trading for influence or (in Congress) for something they need to increase their constituent support. Not an exact parallel, since HRC was already strong, but Obama gave her the SOS to strengthen her int’l credentials.

For me the biggest ding against Harris is the story about her long time colleague/aide losing a case over harassment and retaliation. Harris has dug in and insisted that she knew absolutely nothing about the case. I find that implausible, but that’s her story, and unless something new emerges the whole thing will go away. The worst you can say about her is that she was clueless.

But what if Harris gets the nomination and just three weeks before the election it is proven that she did know about the case? Then she will have lied to protect herself, and knowingly continued to employ someone who was guilty of some odious harassment, and her #metoo credentials will be swirling around the bowl.

Maybe I’m overthinking the whole thing, but it reminds me of the John Edwards scenario where he had a huge skeleton in his closet but continued to run for president.

I didn’t know this until recently, but Harris apparently dated Willie Brown back in the 90s. For those not from California, Willie Brown was the assembly speaker for many years and probably the most powerful politician in California — a mover and shaker in both the best and worst senses — in the 80’s and 90’s.

Well, it doesn’t matter if I like her or not. I’m familiar with her, I know there’s very little I disagree with her on & I’m not electing a best friend or lover. Let’s see if she runs & who else gets in the race.

And could we have dosa ‘n soul food trucks on every corner if she wins?

Am trying to build on the taco trucks theme in case it’s not clear. And given how much the extra-misogynist wing of the Sandernista twitter crew were already attacking her during the senate campaign, I figure there is more and more I am going to like the more I learn about her record, even if there are some decisions she made as a prosecutor that I did not agree with.

A Willie Brown protege? Not sure I want that. Looking at the other stuff, I see things I like and things I really, really don’t like. So, on balance, I’m not totally enthusiastic. But maybe, as I’ve said earlier, she can convince me.

I’m with you – her record here in SF included things I liked and lot I didn’t. As for ol’ Willie, I think it does her a disservice and falls too easily into slighting gender stereotypes to call her a protege, in the sense of her being sponsored by and owing her advancement and loyalty to him. She’s achieved what she has by herself. However, I am REALLY not looking forward to the inevitable slut-shaming because she dated him.

Willie was so sleazy, both as Assembly speaker and as mayor, that I could not bring myself vote for him. Frank Jordan had already proved his incompetence. I wrote in Jello Biafra for mayor.

Haven’t heard her speak, but is she a bit young or just another shockingly well persevered politician? Young looking polls got to have the Obama/ JFK level of excitement about them. Then, again, she would be running against Stupid Hitler so maybe the old rules don’t apply. “I am not or ever will be Donald Trump” is a pretty enticing campaign promise right about now.

remember when Rs wanted to amend the Constitution to let Ahnuld run? I was all for it because of Jennifer Granholm (nee Canadianite) who seems to have faded away. Obama wanted her for DNC chair, but she backed out at the last minute.

I guess she was a good State Attorney General in CA, but I just don’t know anything about her. I mean, I don’t even know if she’s married or has kids or what she did before she was AG.

She was a good AG. Not perfect, but very capable and pretty strongly progressive.

She is married – got married just a few years ago. No kids. Her mom is Indian and her dad is black. She went to Howard. Her dad taught economics at Berkeley, her mom was a cancer researcher there. She lived in Canada for a number of years after her mom took a job at McGill. After Howard she came back to CA, got her JD at Hastings and took a job in the DA office.

@Aleta: Kamela is running to win it although quite possibly she would take a VP spot. She is apparently the winner in the invisible primary among Democratic activists ( the people who work on campaigns) because more would work for her than anybody else. There is lots of great competition and this will be a hard nomination to win for anybody but she is absolutely aiming for the White House.

@Matt McIrvin: Of course the leftie opponents ignore that she has been a cop crusading against the death penalty for years and openly opposed it in her breakout 2010 run where it was probably a political hit to do so.

@A Ghost To Most: if there are real problems, absolutely get them out there, I don’t want a John Edwards thing. I was thinking more along the lines of “I am the True Progressive in this race!” and “The system is rigged!”

She’s got some personnel issues that are going to come up (top aide and sexual harassment for one) and former prosecutors always make me nervous, but a race between her, Beto and Warren would be fascinating and I see Harris as just another corporate moderate Democrat willing to mouth the populist platitudes while maintaining the status quo.

@Martin: She had a totally badass grandma. Grandma was a doctor and was preaching the gospel of family planning in rural India. Kamala spent many of her summers in India growing up. And was inspired by her grandma.

She can definitely win the primary. No one will beat her in the south, and California being so early this time isn’t just an advantage for her being from here … there is the fact that no one else (outside maybe Warren) that will have the name recognition or the money to get name recognition in such a huge media market that early. Bernie is toast here for all the old ladies that run the party, and that whole de leon vs difi kerfuffle did not help him.
I like her. I have no problem voting for her.

@hitchhiker: On the other hand, people tend to look at group that is about 30% women and think “wow, that’s a lot of women”. So a lot of the pushes to get women fully involved tend to stall at about that point.

It’s a concern of mine, a serious concern and it should be for others as well. California may be run by Democrats but law and order lock them up types from both sides have held sway for a long time and at the street level there is a distinct lack of trust when it comes to law enforcement (as an institution) and I say that as someone who watches it unfold every day.

If she espouses reforms for police, the courts and the prisons that’s one thing because reform issues are moving onto the front burner in California and other states (changes to bail, erasure of non-violent cannabis offenses, sentencing and diversion changes etc.) and that will help with a liberal like me. Of course, that opens her up to the spurious claims the GOP will surely trot out, but her career as a prosecutor is an issue that can’t be brushed off.

Someone mentioned it above, I can see her accepting a VP slot, she’s only 54 and has a good 20 or so years left for public service.

She was born in October 1964 I believe. So she’s 54 which is awesome from my point of view but YMMV. She is the daughter of a Tamil Indian immigrant mother who is a doctor (breast cancer researcher) and a Jamaican-American Stanford History professor father. She was raised for part of her childhood in a predominantly African American neighborhood in Berkley. Her parents divorced when she was 7 and her mother later moved Kamala and her sister Maya to Montreal. Kamala graduated from high school in Montreal and went to Howard University and then to the University of California. She was apparently close to her maternal grandfather who was an Indian diplomat and frequently visited her mom’s side of the family in Besant Nagar, Chennai as a child. https://aaregistry.org/story/kamala-harris-born/

I think we’re struggling because that’s non-intuitive for American English speakers, as nearly all multisyllabic words and names have a greater emphasis on at least one syllable in our speech. Then there’s the fact that we have no standard pronunciation of the letter ‘a’ – father, flat, familiar, etc. I have a cousin named Kamala who pronounces it KAMM-uh-luh, and an acquaintance of the same name who says Kuh-MAH-lah. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@EmbraceYourInnerCrone:
There are approximately zero odds that should Harris become a frontrunner we’d see “Birth Certificate II, Electric Boogaloo” from the Republicans. Absolutely no chance of that whatsoever.

Her complicated past is part of her appeal, at least to thinkin’ folks. That’s a vast well of life experience compared to your, say, Mike Pences.

In India it’s pronounced Kamla, with barely any emphasis on the first a. I don’t know why the extra A gets added in so many Indian names. It’s a very traditional Indian name, generally associated with the older generation. Comes from the word “kamal” meaning lotus flower.

trollhattan – I hope you’re right! Sometimes people are amazing stupid however. I really want to see her run and win big. Random aside: her sister Maya worked on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign as a policy adviser..

Dating Willie Brown is not being his protege nor is it acceptable to slander her for a man not in her life. I kinda thought we learned how toxic it is to hold the woman responsible for her man’s professional behaviour with HRC. Plus, sexual harassment in the campaign for a guy she fired? Bring that up. Becker from the current assault allegations rocking Sanders 2020 is/was calling the woman he assaulted to see if she would work on Sanders 2020. Which is why she came forward.

@Ruckus:
Truth. Our county DA is up to her hip in Republican lawnorder politics. Weird in a blue region but then our sheriff is a full-blown media-hatin’ Trumper and they seem to have a mutual admiration club going.

I love Kamala. And no, Vice President isn’t a good enough slot to give her as she is an awesome Senator for me. She is the real deal. Seeing the purity ponies on display leaves me wondering if we’ve learned anything since 2016. I don’t mean the Bernie crew. They are skanks. Kamala is smart as hell, and telegenic.

I’m not declaring her the only one worthy. But I am declaring Bernie the biggest asshole since Paul LePage by willing to burn it all down if he doesn’t get it (like his people did in 2016).

@geg6: Without venturing too much of a guess, do you know those things about anyone else who is expressing an interest in running? I am so scarred by 2016 that I have to forcibly stop myself from pushing back on comments like yours, looking for the source of the misogyny. I know you are female, I read and appreciate your comments all the time, heck, I am pretty sure you are about my age and from the same neck of the woods, so to speak, so I definitely gave you the benefit of the doubt, but I am not surprised others might bristle.

Heh. I realized I mess up her name because in the great Battlestar Galactica show in the 2000s the woman President takes an herb to give her visions called “Kamala extract” with the emphasis on the second syllable. The video of the kids saying her name is perfect. How about “Come along with Kamala”? That’s got a ring to it.

That very well could be and it won’t make a lick of difference either way. The race for the nomination will be interesting but I have no preference for whomever that turns out to be. I have far more pressing issues to waste my energy on and it’s not like I will ever vote GOP.

I was only going by her Wikipedia entry. Along with dating him, it states that he introduced her around among his political circles, so the assumption that he considered her a protege is not unreasonable. If Wikepedia is wrong him doing that, she should ask for an edit.

Nope, you don’t recall correctly at all. The issue I had with Clinton as the nominee was the fact she was an easy target for the GOP and that she stood a good chance of losing and I cast my vote for her as I would have done for whomever the nominee was.

I work for local change, the national party can take care of itself and I don’t trust them and they have given all of us good reason to be skeptical. The latest wave of outspoken liberals unapologetically espousing core liberal policies is encouraging, but let’s not pretend that Democrats have not been party to every federal overreach we have seen in the past 30 years whether that was warrantless wiretapping of private communications, bailing out Wall Street and corporations while foreclosures rocked the nation or voting repeatedly for unending war.

It’s easier for me to be haughty because I live and work in a state where actual liberal policies have been enacted by a liberal legislature. That’s trickled down to the local level where we saw the first all-woman city council in the state’s history elected in the small town of Rio Dell and we have seen a rush of liberal and progressive candidates win seats at the district, city, county and state levels.

Progressive women now dominate the Eureka and Arcata city councils and that influence is growing. Ironically, Harris was the beneficiary of that swing because as a prosecutor 25 years ago she would have been scoffed at as a liberal candidate instead of a smart, accomplished, polished and prepared candidate.

If she’s the nominee she gets the vote but it makes little difference at the micro level.

My Kamala Harris anecdote: My family was friends with the family of an SF DA who worked and socialized frequently with Harris. I remember a gossipy conversation about 15 or 20 years ago (she would have been in her 30s, and I thought of her as quite glamorous and beautiful at the time) in which she was described as fiercely, fiercely ambitious. Like, I think the words were even uttered (or something similar): “She’ll be gunning for president one day.” SF politicos are a special breed…

I love that so many people are joining the 2020 party. We probably all support the general philosophical lean of all of the potential candidates thus far. The tough question when winnowing time comes is who exhibits the most promise to stay laser-focused and get shit done.

@geg6: 20 years ago you couldn’t get anywhere in CA Dem politics without Willie Browns blessing. He was by far the most powerful politician in the state. I suspect that dating him inspired her to purse office. He would have made her entry into politics easier than it otherwise would have been, not to mention being damn near the best advisor you could hope for.

But protege suggests that she learned her approach from him, and I just don’t see that. Her relationship with Brown has really only been a liability ever since that early boost. And she seems to have earned a host of supporters on her own – including Jerry Brown and Obama.

@TaMara (HFG): I hear you. My first Newfie was a Newf-Golden mix. I swear he had the best traits of each breed. What a sweetie! He weighed in at only 115 Lbs., but I was hooked for life … it’s been down hill, (or up-scale?) ever since with Newf rescue.

My only deviation is Miss Murphy who I live with now — a Pyr + Black lab mix, somebody understandably left her with Newf rescue. But wow is she ever a Pyr, hiding out in somebody else’s tuxedo! (and only 90 lbs., a mini.)

There is something about those big big warm bodies leaning against you, those big feet (nails!) stepping on yours first thing in the AM, and the slobber. Oh the slobber. I just tell people who want to pet my dogs on walks that the slobber is good for the skin, and they should massage it in to the back of their hand!! :)

protege – a person under the patronage, protection, or care of someone interested in his or her career or welfare.

No one said and I certainly never said that dating him made her his protege. However, the fact that he is known to have introduced her around and made sure that people with power in the party knew who she was does. I never brought up her dating him in my original comment. As for the idea that being someone’s protege is somehow a slam against them, that’s bullshit. I am a protege of my boss. He thinks I do good work, he makes sure the powers that be know that and he makes sure that they know who I am. I’m sure it was the same with Willie. The fact that I can’t stand him is the problem and her political career seems to have begun after her relationship/friendship with him. If you had no respect for my boss, you probably would have some trepidation about dealing with me. That’s the problem for me.

@eemom: Kamala Harris was elected twice to statewide office in California, a state that has more people than 30 states combined — as AG and as a U.S. Senator. It’s just wrong to refer to her at this point as anyone’s protege. She sprouted wings and has been flying on her own for a long time. Whereas, I didn’t have a problem calling AOC Bernie Sanders’ protege, at least at first, but she seems well on her way to writing her own story. Even when they are single, even when they are in their 50s, people are primed to see women as some male’s appendage. Gotta stop thinking about it because it pisses me off too much.

Actually, I do know those things about a lot of the candidates with which I’m familiar. I guess now it’s not acceptable to be interested in a candidate as a person. I’ll keep that in mind here from now on.

Another great thing about her running. (I got interrupted and this is late, but I’d looked up the Senate Committees that Kamala Harris is on.) Can’t wait until she starts bringing media focus as a candidate to attack Trump and Pence’s abuses in these areas she’s been working on.

@geg6: Our responses crossed. Referring to Harris as a Willie Brown protege is just so wrong in my book. I have to say that I care less than zero about people’s personal life unless it is an impediment and I think our political situation would improve greatly if the personal lives of politicians were not of much interest. I know I am probably not the norm.

@Fair Economist: @schrodingers_cat: I thought that was a given. Besides the obvious answer there are also other motivations like outrage, doing as much as she can to stop Rs in 2020, and using the publicity to try to limit their damage during the next two years. I see her as having a pretty deep perspective on what she’s doing, committed at all levels.

Since when has the word protege become something bad? I have a young woman I’ve been mentoring and I consider her my protege. This is bullshit. Words have actual meanings and the meaning you and Ruemara are attaching to this word is wrong. If I meant what you seem to think I meant, I’d have said mistress or girlfriend or something like. I never brought up her dating him in my original post because I didn’t consider it relevant. What relevant is that the Wikipedia article seemed to imply that he helped her get started in politics. So, she was his protege in that actual meaning of the word.

Jesus fucking Christ, this is the stupidest conversation I’ve had on here since the last time I tried to actually discuss a topic with eemom.

@geg6: Whether you intended it or not “protege” conveys dependence (“one who is protected or trained or whose career is furthered by a person of experience, prominence, or influence”) and it was the first thing that you referred to in your response as if it were the most important or relevant thing about her. Who helped Bill Clinton get started? Who helped Barack Obama get started? We don’t even know these things about men or if we do we think and talk about them in a totally different way. I am sorry I don’t meet your standards for intelligent conversation.

I think that the people who are jumping all over geg6 for asking questions about a candidate who just announced and is from a state far away from her are being assholes. I am sure she will do her due diligence over the coming weeks, but, in the meantime, what is wrong with asking some questions?

Plus you have bigger fish to fry right now with the little one in your family. They can do amazing things. Your niece must feel so helpless, probably not even being able to hold her son very much, if at all. Peace to you and your family.

@Omnes Omnibus: Actually no. I have issues with geg6 being so anti Kamala without having anything reasonable to back it up. And let us be honest, geg6 has painted this page with her doubts and made it an issue.

@Omnes Omnibus: Nice way to skip over what was really being talked about, which is defining Kamala Harris as Willie Brown’s protege. But it’s nice to see you back notwithstanding your obtuse and insulting comment.

@geg6: It seems to me that I’ve learned a lot about Kamala from the responses to your question.

There aren’t enough hours in a day to google all the things I would like to know more about, so sometimes I ask on BJ. Nothing wrong with that, unless someone is lazy and does it all the time. But I don’t think anyone would ever call you lazy.

@Barbara: She went to wikipedia and there was the info about Willie Brown. She doesn’t like Willie Brown so that left her with doubts.

Jumping on geg6 for that seems over the top. Why don’t we let the Republicans eat their own? Otherwise, it’s gonna be a long 2 years of campaigning. We can do it differently. We’re smarter than they are, we can do it better.

@kindness: Well KH has a funny name and immigrant parents, so not a real American, amirite? But that would be rude to point out.
I am getting a distinct whiff of racism/xenophobia in some of the comments.

@WaterGirl: I didn’t jump on anyone. If you look above you will see that I said specifically that I gave her the benefit of the doubt and that I enjoy her comments, which is still true. Others have expressed discomfort over the language as well. So, basically, I said what I think, which is that it’s the kind of language that is used to demean and minimize the accomplishments of women. For that I was told that I was engaging in the stupidest fucking conversation she has ever had on this blog. Hey, this is nothing personal but after 2016 I think we need to be sensitized to the nth degree about how pervasive gender bias still is.

@Barbara: I think it’s fair to say that you jumped on Omnes. The other comments were from hours ago, and I’m not gonna go back and read the thread again so I can get into specifics. I’m just trying to say that we’re all on the same side here. So let’s not burn someone at the stake (gross exaggeration) because they used the word mentor or protege and questioned Kamala.

I’m not crazy about it when some people here make disparaging remarks about Beto, the person I favor, but I try to let it go. It’s super early in the process, and some of us have preferences coming in, often based on who we’re most familiar with or who sparked some excitement for us.

Looks like we will have an embarrassment of riches, candidate-wise, in 2020, and that’s a good thing. There’s a long time yet for things to play out.

For that I was told that I was engaging in the stupidest fucking conversation she has ever had on this blog.

THIS is exactly what I’m talking about.

As is well known, I’m far from Miss Popularity myself, but imo there is something particularly obnoxious about a regular commenter who feels entitled to go ballistic against another regular commenter — especially one whom s/he had engaged in friendly dialogue in the past — at the slightest whisper of disagreement.

And it does remind me of, say, a prom queen who condescends to be nice to the girl who shares her locker and then turns into a raging bully when the girl complains mildly about the cigarette stench on her clothes.

@J R in WV: I, too, have a generic prescription where only one of the three versions of generics works for me. I told the pharmacy that “the last one you gave me works, but the one before that doesn’t”, and they were able to look up which company made the version that works for me.

Now it’s in my record at the pharmacy, and when I need a refill they order in the right one for me. I bet you can do that, too.

It’s less important for me because it’s just what I take if I get a cold sore, but it’s very important for you!

My nasal spray is suppose to provide 165 sprays, and I am prescribed 12 sprays a day, which divides out to be 16 days or so. But the medication carries a 30-day supply assertion, somehow. Come on, folks, this isn’t rocket science, it’s simple math…

@WaterGirl: I think it’s fair to say that telling someone their comment was insulting after they called you an asshole does not constitute jumping all over that person in my lexicon. I don’t know who I support but one thing I don’t support is using gender biased language against any candidate.

And this is why this conversation is stupid. No one used gender biased language. I certainly didn’t. Just like I didn’t have racial dogwhistles as Schroedinger’s Cat implies. But whatever. At this point, I couldn’t possibly care less what you or she think about me. Please pie me, both of you.

@geg6: This isn’t personal to you and I am sorry if it came across that way. This is about the belief of many that language cannot convey or entrench bias so long as they don’t intend bias. I bet Amy Chozick and Maggie Haberman express wonder and indignation that people see deeply damaging bias in their reporting about female politicians. After all, they are feminist (well Chozick is).

Men have supporters, advocates and allies. Women have protectors, a term that conveys dependence and weakness and gives credit to others for their success. Wikipedia used the term but you defended it.

I started scrubbing my language for such terms especially as they reflect societal bias against gay people, even though I try not share that bias. I don’t think this is a stupid conversation. I think it’s important to consider implicit bias in the language that is used to describe women, gay people, and minorities.

Again, I did not use a word that has a sexist connotation. You may choose to see it that way, but it’s not true. When one person helps another along in a career, that second person can be called a protege. There is nothing sexist about it. As I mentioned above, I am helping a younger woman move up in our career. She is my protege. Is it sexist of me to do that? Should I stop helping her? Should I quit taking her under my wing? Should I not ever have a protege for fear of being called a sexist? Ridiculous bullshit.

The term protege bespeaks favoritism, as well as dependence and ownership that I would try to avoid in describing a work relationship. When a person’s support at the beginning of a career more than 25 years prior is the first thing that is used to describe a highly successful woman, it’s sexist. Show me a comparable descriptor of a man in the same or similar position. At any rate, one outcome of this discussion has probably been to remove the word “protege” from the Wikipedia entry for Harris, because it’s no longer there. Your propensity to call people who disagree with your view “bullshit” or “stupid” or “ridiculous” isn’t making your argument more persuasive.

I like pie, too. Sadly, I have never had pie with any jackals before, but there’s a first time for everything. But your pie is much too condescending and deliberately obtuse. So I’d rather not have pie with you.